Quality: grain · Allium cepa (onion)

1. sulfur atomResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
2. Gibberellic acidResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
3. carbendazimResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
4. mancozebResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
5. applicationPositive and negative results6 papers: 5 positive, 1 negative or no effect
6. fertilizationPositive and negative results5 papers: 3 positive, 2 negative or no effect
7. coldPositive and negative results4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect
8. irrigationPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
9. densityPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
10. transplantingPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
11. processingResults agree5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect
12. nitrogenResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
13. potassiumResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
14. storageResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
15. botanicalResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
16. classResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
17. inoculationResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
18. pollinationResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. Claims that compare genotypes are left out; a claim about lacking a nutrient counts the other way round in that nutrient’s question. “Results differ” marks a question where two model reviewers, reading both claims, accepted at least one pair of papers whose results differ.